MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3096109600 · doi:10.1182/blood-2020-141235

Outcomes of Adult and Pediatric Patients with Hematologic Malignancies and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 1847 Patients

2020· review· en· W3096109600 sur OpenAlexaff
Abi Vijenthira, Inna Y. Gong, Thomas A. Fox, Stephen Booth, Gordon Cook, Bruno Fattizzo, Fernando Martín‐Moro, Jérôme Razanamahery, John C. Riches, Jeffrey I. Zwicker, Rushad Patell, Marie Christiane Vekemans, Lydia Scarfò, Thomas Chatzikonstantinou, Halil Yıldız, Raphaël Lattenist, Ioannis Mantzaris, William A. Wood, Lisa K. Hicks

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2020
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Établissements canadiensSt. Michael's HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineMeta-analysisConfidence intervalInternal medicinePopulationMalignancyMechanical ventilationCancerHematologic malignancy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Clinical outcomes for patients with hematologic malignancy and COVID-19 have not been aggregated. We completed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the risk of death and other important outcomes for these patients. Methods: We searched Pubmed and EMBASE up to July 25, 2020, to identify reports of patients with hematologic malignancy and COVID-19 (including papers where the patients with hematologic malignancy were a subset of the total study population). The primary outcome was a pooled mortality estimate, considering all patients and only hospitalized patients. Secondary outcomes included pooled estimates for the risk of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and non-invasive ventilation in hospitalized patients. Mortality data were stratified by age, treatment status, and malignancy subtype. For treatment status, "systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT)" was defined as patients on any anti-cancer therapy. "Cytotoxic SACT" was defined as patients on cytotoxic therapy only. "Not on treatment" was defined as patients on observation or those who were at least 28 days beyond their last active treatment. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on the primary outcomes limiting to studies with low risk of bias, and to studies including both outpatients and hospitalized patients. Due to data limitations, only the primary outcome was assessed for pediatric studies. Pooled prevalence and risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model using MetaXL and Revman 5.4 software. Results: A total of 25 adult studies and 4 pediatric studies comprising 1847 patients from China, Europe, the United Kingdom, and North America were included (Figure 1 and Table 1). The majority of patients were hospitalized (83%). The overall risk of death amongst all patients was 36% (95% CI 31-41, N=1763), and amongst hospitalized patients was 40% (95% CI 36-45, 24 studies with 1295 patients) (Figure 2). Patients aged >60 years had a significantly higher risk of death than patients <60 years (46% vs. 26%, RR 1.56, 95%CI 1.15-2.13, N=597) (Figure 3). The pooled risk of death in pediatric patients was 4% (95% CI 1-9, N=102) (Figure 2). The risk of ICU admission among hospitalized adult patients was 23% (95% CI 17-29, N=1165); mechanical ventilation 16% (95% CI 12-21, N= 826); and non-invasive ventilation 16% (95% CI 9-26%, N=373). The estimated RR of death among patients on SACT compared to no treatment was 1.22 (95% CI 0.84-1.78; N=457, Figure 3a). The RR of death among patients on cytotoxic SACT versus no treatment was similar at 1.29 (95% CI 0.78-2.15; N=176, Figure 3b). All subgroups of hematologic malignancy had high risks of overall mortality: acquired bone marrow dysfunction syndromes 57% (95% CI 42-72, 11 studies, 42 patients); leukemias 44% (95% CI 31-58, 15 studies, 159 patients), plasma cell dyscrasias 38% (95% CI 29-47, 18 studies, 387 patients); lymphomas (including CLL) 32% (95% CI 26-38, 16 studies, 696 patients); lymphomas (excluding CLL) 32% (95% CI 18-48, 11 studies, 156 patients); CLL 31% (95% CI 24-39, 13 studies, 457 patients); myeloproliferative neoplasms 37% (95% CI 25-49, 9 studies, 62 patients). Sensitivity analysis including only studies with a low risk of bias showed a similar estimate for risk of death among all patients (37% (95% CI 31-42, 20 studies with 1412 patients)) compared to all studies. Sensitivity analysis including only studies reporting on a combination of outpatients and hospitalized patients also showed a similar estimate for risk of death among all patients (38% (95% CI 32-44), 11 studies with 1214 patients) compared to all studies. Conclusion: Adult patients with hematologic malignancy and COVID-19, especially hospitalized patients, appear to experience a high risk of dying (pooled risk estimate 36%). Older patients experience higher mortality, and pediatric patients appear to be relatively spared. Importantly, based on the observational data available to date, recent cancer treatment does not appear to significantly increase the risk of dying. These data highlight the need for robust strategies to prevent patients with hematologic malignancy from contracting COVID-19, and may help inform discussions about prevention strategies, treatment, and goals of care. Disclosures Cook: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; IQVIA: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Zwicker:Dova: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Portola: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Incyte: Research Funding; Quercegen: Research Funding; Parexel: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; CSL: Consultancy; Pfizer/BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board. Scarfo:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Wood:Pfizer: Research Funding; Best Doctors/Teladoc: Consultancy; Koneksa Health: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Elektra Labs: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ASH Research Collaborative: Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding. Hicks:Gilead Sciences: Research Funding.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,012
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Méta-analyse · Signal consensuel: Méta-analyse
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,013
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,061

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0120,027
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0130,032
Bibliométrie0,0060,008
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0030,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,057
Tête enseignante GPT0,336
Écart entre enseignants0,279 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeMéta-analyse
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→Travaux en français237 207→